The Democratic Party of Korea is currently embroiled in factional tensions surrounding the selection of candidates for the upcoming April 10 parliamentary elections, amid accusations that the party is sidelining those not aligned with the party leader. Similarly, the People Power Party is grappling with the aftermath of these selections. The backlash of unhappy lawmakers against candidate nomination is a common occurrence before nearly evey election. The issue arises from nominating candidates based on vague and unjust criteria, significantly threatening a democracy. However, this is just one small problem arousing from the decades-old chronic problem of Korean Politics: concentration of power and korean political system prioritizing "one team."
In the Korean political history, power has been predominantly concentrated in the hands of a few politicians. The pursuit of power in politics often resulted in establishemet of policies geared towards garnering votes and populism. Moreover, the recent turmoil surrounding candidate nominations highlights the consequences of one lawmaker having excessive power. Powerful political leaders cannot deflect criticism for attempting to use the selection process to strengthen their influence in the party. This dominance extends to nominating candidates close to them, ultimatley leading already powerful members to accumulate more influence, leaving non-mainstream members with little choice but to align with them. The bottom 10-20 percent of lawmakers create and join reform party under the pretext of reform, but their underlying motive is the regaining of power. Lawmakers should not pursue power for its own sake, but prioritzie serving the needs of the citiznes. Those with power should exert their influence to place the right people in the right positions, even if those individuals do not pledge allegiance to them.
A critical issue in the Korean political system is political parties' prioritization of "our side" over the principles of justice. A comparison with the U.S. presidential system reveals notable differences. In the U.S., lawmakers, whether in their first or tenth term, are treated equally under constitutional institutions. They enjoy the same freedom and independence, and crucially, they are allowed to exercise a free vote, representing their constituents rather than their political affiliations. In South Korea, many times, party members unify their votes based on an official party view. Reforming the Korean political system is essential to ensure that individual lawmakers' votes accurately reflect the interests of residents rather than being dictated by the party.
Dubious standards taint the integrity of nominations, necessitating a call for fairness and transparency in the candidate selection process. To achieve this, politicians should step away from power struggles, and pave a new for a lawmaking system where each policymaker can cast their votes freely. The ultimate solution lies in localizing power and implementing crucial reforms in the political system.
첫댓글 전체적으로 정보값이 풍부하고 문장간 매끔한 연결이 돋보이는 글이었습니다. 공천 과정 뿐만이 아니라 한 지도자가 자신의 입지를 더 공공히 다지는 도구로 공천 과정이 남용된다는 포인트가 글의 깊이를 더해주는 것 같습니다. 또한 미국과 비교 사례를 넣어 더 차별화된 글이 아니었나 생각합니다. 퇴고 시 약간의 오타말고는 딱히 반영할 건 없어보입니다.
글의 서두에서 현재의 상황을 시의성있게 다뤄주셔서 좋았습니다. 전반적으로 날카로운 분석과 깔끔한 흐름이 인상깊었습니다. 만약 퇴고를 하신다면, 한국 정치의 특징이라고 할 수 있는 양당제/양극화 등의 키워드를 활용해주셔도 좋을 것 같습니다! 미국과의 비교도 좋았습니다. 다만, 미국과 우리나라의 정치 지형이나 제도가 근본적으로 다른 부분이 있어서 그 부분에 대한 반론을 방어할 언급이 한, 두 문장정도 있으면 어떨까 합니다.
잘 읽었습니다. 수고 많으셨습니다 ~!
균형감있는 서술과 문제의식이 돋보였습니다. 지역구에 대해 언급해주신 내용도 돋보일 수 있는 대목이라고 생각합니다.
다만 문장들이 너무 길어질 때 독자가 다소 끊어지는 느낌을 받을 수도 있다고 생각합니다. 어떤 문장들은 조금씩만 더 짧아져도 가독성이 올라가지 않을까 생각합니다. 수고하셨습니다!